In an exclusive interview, Premier Graham talked about his government

Q: What are your impressions of the 2007 Post Secondary Education report that recommended that UNBSJ lose its status? What did you think of the protests and controversy that followed?

A: “We launched an independent, and I want to emphasize independent, report on how to strengthen our post-secondary education system in the province of New Brunswick. When the report was released, publicly the government had not even received it yet. So we hadn’t had an opportunity to respond. There were many good facets of the report that were student focused that we recognized as being important. We didn’t want to start responding to certain pieces of the report without releasing a complex plan to deal with the transmission. So the conundrum I was faced with at the time was that, you know, we can’t start cherry picking out of this report.

“We’ve always known that UNBSJ would play a strong role and now I think the track record speaks for itself, the record of investments that we’re making here, the infrastructure and the new medical program that’s being developed. But our goal was also to integrate this campus with the community college network in the province of New Brunswick and we’ve been able to achieve that objective today, and I’m very proud the end goals have been met and I was very proud of actually having a debate about post-secondary education in the history of our province. You know it had been decades since we’d seen students become engaged. Because the debate had always centered on healthcare, which is very challenging for governments to find solutions to, here was an opportunity where we found a new model of transforming post-secondary education that’s going to benefit generations to come.”

Q: New Brunswick students face some of the highest rates of student debt in the country. What has your government done to solve this problem?

A: “We’ve taken a number of proactive steps. On the first day of our mandate in 2006, we eliminated the requirement for parental income to be assessed in student loans. That simply didn’t make sense that if you were a young student entering university that you were going to be penalized on the amount of loan you could receive because of your parent’s income. So we changed that policy.”

“We have also for the last three years frozen tuition rates at our universities which has been at a cost of approximately six million dollars a year to government, because the universities had to offset that freeze by having increased funding from government for their increased operational costs, so the government of New Brunswick picked up that cost of freezing tuition versus the students paying for it”

“We also doubled the tuition rebate from $10,000 to $20,000. So if you remain in the province of New Brunswick to work after completing your degree, you’re eligible for those tax credits up to $20,000. And the most innovative program that we’ve put forward is the new cap on student debt, today with the timely completion of your degree your debt will be lowered to $26,000 with the cap in place. So, you may have a student debt load of $32,000 but within four years of completion we’ll cover the difference. This program out debt load more in line with the national average of $24,000 compared to where we were at $32,000.”

Q: You mentioned in your speech that one of the primary concerns facing the province has been retaining young people in the province after they graduate. Is this going to be a major priority for your government if you receive a second mandate?

A: “Our government’s agenda is going to be very much about creating seasoned opportunities for every New Brunswicker, to remain here in the province after they’ve completed their studies. We have an aging population base and we need more young people in the province, which is why we’ve implemented our plan for lower taxes, which is all geared towards growing the middle class in the province of New Brunswick to have more people carry the weight to pay for the social programs like healthcare and education.”

Q: Previous governments in New Brunswick have suggested the possibility of reforming the province’s first past the post system into some kind of mixed system that incorporates elements of proportional representation. What is your government’s position on this issue?

A: “It’s not our government’s priority right now, in the midst of this recession. Our party’s focused on the economy, on the learning agenda, on health and senior care, and that’s where we’re going to stay focused.”

Q: You’ve mentioned that the job of Premier can be personally taxing and stressful. What are some examples?

A: “I literally start every morning 6:00 or 6:30 and I’m out of the house, I don’t arrive at home until 9:30 or 10:00 at night. But, you know, I love this job. I have an opportunity to travel to every corner of the province and across the country. And even though the hours are long, it’s meeting the people and getting their input, for ideas that will better our province that makes this job so rewarding.”

Q: When your premiership reaches its conclusion, what would you like to seen as your government’s

A: “That we truly brought our province into the 21^st century, that we undertook some major social reforms in the midst of a global economic recession that made our province stronger and more competitive. And I’m confident that New Brunswick can become self sufficient in the next 20 years. We don’t have the oil and gas reserves today of Nova Scotia or Newfoundland, but we have our people. And that’s what’s going to give us a competitive advantage and we’re laying that foundation today. I’m confident that’s how we’ll be judged in a good light.”

NB Power issue dominates questions from student audience.

By Ben Hicks

“I’m not here to lobby for one particular party over another,” Shawn Graham explained. “I’m asking you to become engaged.”

The New Brunswick Premier was addressing a crowded lecture hall of students, giving a talk on the importance of becoming engaged in the political process. However, a moment later this topic had seamlessly shifted to the many accomplishments of his government. A topic for which he had no lack of enthusiasm.

“We have a great track record to be proud of and in the last year of our mandate we could have taken the easy way out and ran on the laurels that we were able to achieve.”  As evidence, Graham explained that his government’s policies were achieving positive results on issues like the province’s declining population, students leaving the province, and unemployment.

“But as I said at the beginning of this, I never wanted to be a career politician. We wanted to tackle some of the bigger files, and one of the biggest files we have to tackle is energy.”

It would be more than a week later that the controversial NB Power deal would be publicly cancelled over friction between the New Brunswick and Quebec governments. But this March 15^th afternoon, the then imminent plan to sell substantial assets of NB Power to Hydro Quebec took up the bulk of the questions -  despite the Premier’s expressed wishes. “I don’t want that one debate to monopolize all of the questions today.”

When asked by a student how much power rates would increase after the declared five year freeze, Graham said he would refrain from answering on the grounds that “I don’t want to scoop myself.”

“But what I can tell you is that the rate increases will be much lower after five years than if we had to be dependant on those fuel sources such as oil and coal going it alone” instead of Quebec Hydro power. The exact figures would be released the following week, he said.

One student near the back of the room pointedly asked why the Premier was refusing to put “the most divisive issue of his government,” up for public referendum. He argued that this made the Liberals appear “undemocratic.”

In response, the Premier warned against the slippery slope that begins once a country’s citizens interfere with the decisions of their politicians.

“The challenge of any referendum is that you can have lobby groups that can sway a vote in a referendum. You can have an unbalanced point of view. In any referendum, minority rights are often forgotten. If we’d had a referendum in New Brunswick 30 years ago on capital punishment, it would have said ‘you need to have capital punishment.’ That’s the danger today of moving to the American-style system of government by referendum.”

Graham explained ominously what this would entail: “In America today, almost every question from the hiring of the local dog catcher and the sheriff to issues of politics are governed by referendum. I hear constantly from Congress people and people in the Senate that they are paralyzed in making decisions because they are always engaged in a popularity contest.”

“Well,” said Graham in a matter-of-fact tone, “I’m not here today to win a popularity contest.”

Given the money already invested in utilities like Point Lapreau, asked another student, why not look for other potential buyers to get a better deal?

“Because it’s not going to happen.” Graham said bluntly. He explained that Quebec was the only the jurisdiction willing to make an offer. Quebec being New Brunswick’s only neighbour “capable of producing cheap hydro power” and in possession of a nuclear reactor.

Describing the debate that had taken place in the province, the Premier said: “NB Power is like your kid brother. You’ve hated him all your life, the minute someone starts picking on him you’re going to stand up to protect him. I knew that was the problem I was going to be faced with.”

“There’s so much misinformation out there through different means that it’s very difficult to hold a true and proper debate on this issue,” Graham lamented. “It’s become very polarized. That’s very unfortunate.”

Later, Graham told the Baron that this misinformation in the province was the reason that his government was using public dollars to fund public relation firms like Hill and Knowlton to help the government promote the NB Power sale to the public.

Said Graham: “Hill and Knowlton is based out of Ottawa, they’re a leading company, and we’ve also engaged in a number of New Brunswick based communications companies as well, to work with Hill And Knowlton, because as you know today a big issue has been a lot of the misinformation that’s out there. We’re trying to correct it. That’s why we need to make sure we engage the best people to help us explain and answer any questions New Brunswickers wanted.”

When asked about concerns that the plan was proceeding with too much haste, the Premier replied that: “We can’t afford to see another mill close in the province of New Brunswick, we can’t afford to see another community impacted by the closure of their industries because of our uncompetitive power rates, that’s why we’re driving this agenda today.”

On the 25^th of March, it was announced that the deal would not occur due to disagreements between the New Brunswick and Quebec governments.

Ben Hicks is the Chief Editor of the Baron.

By: Don Morgenson — The Cord

WATERLOO, Ont. (CUP) — More than 2.6 million Canadians with mental illness have suffered quietly, shamed into reticence by the stigma associated with their condition.

Almost half of these people will not seek care.

Many lives are lost through suicide — Canada has the third-highest suicide rate in the industrialized world for the age group 15 through 24 years — and at least half a million Canadians suffer from depression.

The hardest hit are teens and young adults.

Complicating such problems is the fact that mental disorders have been largely neglected by public health practitioners and are widely ignored in the collective mind of the public.

As a result, health professionals and society at large have tended to minimize issues of mental illness. Mental disorders never make the top 10 public health concerns, yet they should be confronted rather than relegated to the margins of public health concerns.

Disability-Adjusted Life Years, or DALYs, are years of life lost because of premature death or years lived with disability. The burden, in other words, is determined by taking into account mortality as well as suffering.

One DALY is one lost year of healthy life. When DALYs are included in health indices, mental disorders rank almost as high as cardiovascular and respiratory disorders and surpass all types of cancer.

The Global Burden of Disease, determined by the World Health Organization, reports that the suffering caused by major depression is equivalent to that caused by blindness or paraplegia; the disability caused by schizophrenia is estimated to be somewhere between paraplegia and quadriplegia.

Depressive disorders, as a single category, are estimated to be the fourth-leading cause of suffering worldwide. Recent research addressing the indivisible unity of mind and body indicates that various mental disorders such as depression and insomnia pose significant risks for developing physical problems such as coronary heart disease.

Given these facts, what must be done? Diagnosis is an appropriate place to begin. Modern brain imaging reveals that in some psychological disorders, neural circuits responsible for moods, thought, sleep and appetite fail to function properly and in other cases, critical neurotransmitters such as serotonin are severely impaired.

Studies in behaviour genetics indicate that vulnerability to some mental disorders results, in part, from the combined influence of multiple genes and environmental factors.

Research into one’s environment suggests that some psycho-social factors like unemployment and poverty contribute to some psychological difficulties.

Given how susceptible we all are to mental illness, it is essential to make mental health issues mainstream and bring them into various forms of public health research.

Mental illnesses are a major part of the global burden of diseases. People with mental disorders experience significant suffering, severely limiting their functioning at the physical, personal and social levels.

Such suffering leads to a poorer quality of life, with families and communities equally affected. The need to address such a global problem is urgent and means addressing such issues now. Only then can we limit the amount of suffering faced by future generations.

By: Eli Levinson — The Link

MONTREAL (CUP) — When the Haitian earthquake struck, it quickly became the news story of the year, with constant coverage of the most minute details of the disaster dominating the news for days. Then of course, as the initial shock wore off for those not directly tied to what happened, we moved on, and the media got back to their usual reporting.

Like any other major news event, it followed the pattern of furious initial coverage which quickly becomes no coverage at all as the goldfish mentality and craving for the next big item superseded any considerations for the plight of those at the heart of the story.

At the same time, we stopped talking about it, stopped trying to help, stopped having events, stopped having the victims at the heart of the story in our minds.

Now, even though there is an unfolding story taking place, a story of a people trying to rebuild something cruelly taken away, it is no longer of any importance to us. If the media started round-the-clock coverage of the rebuilding effort in Haiti, our reaction would most likely be, “Why are they showing us this? It’s not news.”

This is the contradiction of modern mass media: it has constructed in our minds an idea of human activity as being based on specific events. People and stories cycle through quickly and the world is explained in very small doses, when in reality these stories take place over a much longer period of time than we are willing to devote to them.

We live in a fast-paced world that communicates rapidly. That does not mean the millions of stories taking place all around the world are fast-paced — far from it. Nobody is going to believe that life has no nuance, and yet our consumption of news hinges on this idea of simplified news bites. If it takes longer than five minutes to explain what is going on, it is not a news story — it’s a sociology paper.

And we go along with it because we don’t have the time or desire to understand the situation in more detail. It is very difficult for people with no stake in an event to maintain a high level of interest for very long, given the slowly unfolding drama that happens every day all over the world.

It is very easy to blame the media and those in power for creating the short attention spans that define our generation, but that is not the whole story.

How do we consume media, and specifically news? Do we have the time every day to follow up — in depth — on all the things that pop up on our radar, to really engage with these stories that rarely have obvious turning points or climaxes and are more like a Dostoyevsky novel? Whose fault is this? Or is playing the blame game a waste of time?

Changing our attitudes and patterns, as reflected in the media, is something that takes effort. It’s an ongoing struggle that cannot be explained by specific moments and is best understood in hindsight.

By: Samantha Lockhart — The Manitoban

WINNIPEG (CUP) — David Levin and Richard Sparling have been collecting Tim Hortons cups for more than just what’s under the rim — they’re converting the cups into biofuel.

The two University of Manitoba professors are looking for bacteria that can eat cellulose chains directly, breaking them into smaller sugars and eventually hydrogen or ethanol.

Because the research focuses not only on how the metabolism of the bacteria works, but also on what the bacteria should be fed, coffee cups became a viable option to try. Prior to using the Tim’s cups, they used easily available hemp and flax from Manitoba.

“But it occurred to me one day as I was passing by Tim Hortons . . . that this would be a perfect substrate for our bacteria to eat,” said Levin, an associate professor of biosystems engineering. “Plus, (you) can’t recycle them.”

He doesn’t know how many cups are sold daily on the University of Manitoba campus, “but I bet it’s a lot.”

Sparling, an associate professor of microbiology, said the idea started by just buying a coffee and rolling up the rims.

Then, he said, “Instead of throwing our Tim Hortons cup, we actually put it in a medium . . . and then asked, ‘Will it degrade?’ ”

Sparling said that the two were originally unsure whether the cups would break down because of the colours used to dye them, as well as the plasticized liners that prevent the cups from leaking.

But, he said, “it worked quite well.”

The two researchers looked into using both Tim Hortons and Starbucks cups — however, it appears the bacteria works on the Tim Hortons cups more effectively.

“There’s something in the Starbucks cup that’s more inhibitory, and that’s one of the things we want to find out,” said Levin. “What is the difference between the cups, and what’s the best way to process them and what can we make out of them?”

The bacteria did degrade the Starbucks cups, but they worked more effectively with those from Tim Hortons.

“I think it has nothing to say about Tim Hortons or Starbucks, as opposed to different companies will be using different suppliers,” said Sparling. “What it tells us is strictly regarding our bacterium. I would not infer one (cup) is more biodegradable than the other.”

Sparling was surprised that the Tim Hortons cups are not recyclable and said their research “is a way of recycling, in the sense that we are taking a product that is of low value and it is converted into a product that we hope is of value, meaning biofuel.”

The researchers said that the Tim Hortons headquarters in Oakville, Ont. has contacted them, saying they heard about the project and were very interested in helping support it. In the coming weeks, they hope to discuss with the company what the next steps will be.

Currently, Levin and Sparling are doing small scale testing on a lab bench but they hope to scale up to a bioreactor in the coming month.

“As we scale up into to the higher concentration,” said Levin, “we’ll be able to get a good idea of actually how much . . . fuel we can make.”

“Then we could do that calculation and say that ‘OK, if we took all the cups sold in Canada in a year and put them into bioreactors, we might make enough ethanol . . . to run your car for a year,’ or something like that. We can’t do that yet, but that’s the kind of thing we want to get to,” he continued.

Sparling said that this research could be one of many ways to reduce dependency on fossil fuels.

“I don’t think that we would be able to replace the Alberta oil wells with Tim Hortons cups,” he said, but “recycling and biofuel productions from Tim Hortons cups would . . . hopefully capture imagination.”

“Imagine if every household were to make sure that their newspaper or other products were also converted to biofuels.”

By: Dan McPeake — The Peak

BURNABY, B.C. (CUP) — Oh France! Number one in the world in heath care, and recently voted best place in the world to live (probably because of the health care).  So, why do you want to ban burqas?

A French parliamentary report released earlier this year recommends banning the burqa and the niqab — two versions of the full-body veil worn by some Muslim women — from most public spaces. French president Nicolas Sarkozy also supports the ban.

At 3.5 million, Muslims make up a large percentage of the population in France. Now, it’s true that not all Muslim women wear the burqa, but it is wrong to punish the ones that do. Sarkozy argued that the controversy has nothing to do with religion and is instead about women’s freedom and dignity.

Freedom must have a different meaning to Sarkozy than it does to me. Unless I am mistaken, I thought having freedom meant having a choice: a choice to wear specific clothing, a choice to be a member of a specific religion, a choice to live life however you choose. A partial ban on the burqa, or any full veil for that matter, would not only take away a woman’s right to wear one, but would also be considered an attack on her religion.

Now it’s true that France is officially a secular state. Interestingly enough, however, the Christian Sarkozy wants to lessen the gap between the separation of the church and the state and relax France’s fiercely secular culture. Yet he says the burqa ban is not about religion.

In one aspect I, agree with the French politicians. Rather than being discriminated against for being Muslims, these women are being discriminated against because they are women. This only serves to make the situation worse. Considering that only 2,000 Muslim women in the country actually wear the full veil, is a ban even worthwhile for something that small?

On the other hand, it is exactly about religion. If France calls itself a secular state, then a ban on burqas would be a ban on religion. However, France cannot call itself a secular state for two reasons. The majority of the French population identify as Catholic. Second, the head of state is a Catholic who wants to narrow the separation between church and state.

And despite France’s secularism, French presidents all become first and only honorary canon of The Basilica of Saint John of Lateran, a Catholic honour bestowed upon French leaders since the time of King Henry IV.

Being a secular state means having no dominant religion — it doesn’t mean having no religion. What did the Muslim women ever do?

Just because someone wears a piece of religious clothing or a religious artifact does not mean they are shoving it down your throats; they are simply choosing a way to live their lives. How can we punish them for that?

If the Pope came to France, he would not be required to disrobe or remove his hat, so what right does the French government have to tell Muslim women that they can’t wear veils. Similarly, there would be an uproar in India if the government did not allow Sikhs to wear their turbans.

The taking away of rights — whether it be gay marriage or the right to wear religious clothing — is wrong. People have a right to freedom of expression, religious or otherwise. A Muslim woman wearing a burqa or niqab won’t make Paris any less French or any less Christian; it will make it more diverse. That’s the way the world should be.

By: Fraser Turnbull — The Xaverian Weekly

ANTIGONISH, N.S. (CUP) — Human beings still revere photography as capturing the truth. In courtrooms, photographs are used as evidence as to whether or not an event took place, and in some cases they can mean the difference between a verdict of guilty or innocent.

But in today’s digital age, with increasingly powerful photo manipulation tools at our disposal, the truth of photographic images is that they are anything but reliable.

The leading graphics editing program used by professionals and amateurs worldwide is Adobe Photoshop. With Photoshop, people can modify the images they are working with, either by adding or removing content, or enhancing existing content.

The software celebrated its 20-year anniversary in mid-February of this year.

Photoshop allows users to manipulate photos in a variety of ways. There are tools to reduce redeye, smudge, sharpen or blur parts of images, and a “magic wand” to remove the background behind a subject in an image.

Since the inception of Photoshop, pictures in the media have become more frequently edited to represent a reality that the photographer wants to capture.

This practice used to be the domain of such highly esteemed publications as *Weekly World News* but has since been seen in most newspapers and magazines, albeit with more highly sophisticated photos.

This manipulation of images has raised questions about the difficulties of understanding reality in terms of photography. However, Photoshop was never to blame. Photography has always been like this — Photoshop just made it obvious.

People like to think that photos capture the truth, but in most cases that is a delusional claim. The very ritual of taking a photograph — for example, a family picture — involves one simple word that exposes how fake the image actually is: “Smile.”

Before taking a photograph, we are asked to smile, regardless of our actual emotional state. An individual could be angry, depressed, sullen or surly, but when that photograph is taken, we plaster on a smile for the few seconds until the shot is captured. And somehow this is taken to be an accurate representation of a family.

Posed photographs are another area of debate. Famous shots of sharecroppers during the Great Depression were posed by photographers and hundreds of shots were taken, examined, and the ones that most accurately represented the photographer’s opinion on the matter were used.

This doesn’t accurately depict reality, but the bias of one individual who uses the images to support their stance.

This is much like how university students scan and discard Facebook images they don’t want on their profiles to create an album of themselves that doesn’t quite accurately depict the reality of their lives.

Even without Photoshop, individuals have taken pictures that have tricked others using the simplest of methods.

The famous Cottingley Fairies pictures were a series of photographs taken by two cousins, Elsie Wright and Frances Griffiths, who posed with cardboard cut-outs of fairies and convinced the world that such creatures existed.

Tourists visiting Europe and other countries have their own photographs that depict themselves holding up prominent landmarks like the Eiffel Tower or leaning on the Roman Coliseum. All of these images use illusion and perspective to trick the eye without capturing the reality of the situation.

What Photoshop does is allow for photographs to be manipulated after they are taken, whereas previously they were posed and shaped within the shot.

This has made obvious the apparent untruths of an image, mainly through several silly websites celebrating them by editing and sharing absurd images.

An example of this is the blog “Nic Cage As Everyone,” which uses Photoshop to make actor Nicholas Cage’s look like everyone, from Barack Obama and Abraham Lincoln to Hannah Montana and Justin Bieber.

Others, like “Selleck Waterfall Sandwich,” have composed images that include three random components — in this case, actor Tom Selleck of *Magnum PI*, a waterfall and a sandwich.

Finally, manbabies.com asks users to switch the head of a father and child to hilarious results. The photos may not be real, but they are fun.

Getting riled up about the apparent truth or untruth of an image is ultimately a futile venture. Photographs can, and always will, be manipulated.

Rather than argue over the merits of Photoshopped images versus untouched ones, we should enjoy the plentiful websites celebrating absurd manipulations of reality like placing Nicholas Cage’s head on everyone, and remember that images are not always real.

By: Henry Gass — The McGill Daily

MONTREAL (CUP) — In the wake of crackdowns on powerful Mexican drug lords, a ripple effect across North America has sparked new levels of drug-related violence on the streets of Vancouver.

Competition over dwindling supplies of cocaine and heroin has law enforcement agencies battling to contain the potential violence between rival distributors competing over what is left of the market.

“Violence has gone in cycles. There are relative lulls in violence followed by periods of extreme violence,” said Sgt. Shinder Kirk, of the Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit-British Columbia (CFSEU-BC) Gang Task Force.

Kirk said that turf disputes between mid- and street-level traffickers is one of the most common catalysts for violence. According to Kirk, there are around 130 known groups operating in drug trafficking in British Columbia, which can be divided into organized crime, mid-level trafficking, and street-level distributors.

“It’s all to do with the drug trade. There are disputes between groups over market turf, over who controls the drug trade in a particular community,” said Kirk.

The CFSEU-BC website identifies the most visible and violent organized crime groups in British Columbia as the Bacon/Red Scorpions Group and the United Nations Gang. But while they are the main distributors of drugs throughout the province, Kirk says they are not responsible for the majority of the violence.

Glenn Fisher, of the Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU), said that gang violence has been subdued since an intense period of bloodshed between the Scorpions and the UN Gang in 2009, which was marked by several drive-by shootings.

“(Now) violence here is among individuals, not gangs,” said Fisher. “The drugs are no good. People have been selling garbage. . . . There have been a lot of stabbings.”

Last year, in response to the escalating feuds between organized-crime groups in Vancouver, the CFSEU-BC launched a widespread operation to stem the bloodshed in British Columbia. According to Fisher, it appears they have succeeded in reducing much of the violence, at least for the moment.

“(The gangs) were feuding with each other,” he said, but “a lot of the action has quieted down,” he said.

The level of violence in Mexico seems to have had a neutralizing effect on the domestic drug trade. Fisher said that trade relationships that used to exist with Mexico have now ceased to exist because of the intensification of violence there.

“We have a high grade of marijuana here, which we used to trade for cocaine,” said Fisher. “But people are scared to deal with Mexicans. Mexico is a very violent country right now; everyone is getting killed.”

Vancouver’s coastal location and proximity to the drug centres of California and Mexico has rendered it the focal point of the Canadian drug trade.

Neil Boyd, professor of criminology at Simon Fraser University, said that all Canadian ports are affected by the international drug trade. “A lot of drug traffic goes through Vancouver. That comes with the designation of being a port,” said Boyd. “Even Montreal is affected.”

CFSEU-BC now focuses on prevention, intervention, and enforcement, with uniformed and covert investigators working to prevent violence, according to Kirk. He also highlighted the cooperation between law enforcement agencies across Canada and North America.

“Organized crime has been around (Vancouver) for centuries if you talk about groups like Asian Triads or the Mafia . . . but they are not prone to violence,” Kirk said.

With organized crime spreading east, Kirk said the CFSEU-BC has been talking with various agencies in Calgary, Edmonton, California, and across North America.

Vancouver is just one link in a symbiotic international drug trade, and Kirk said that crackdowns on the flourishing drug trade in Mexico have had an effect on British Columbia. According to Kirk, while a high demand for Mexican drugs remains in the province, supplies have dwindled, increasing competition despite the current lull in violence.

“Groups here have ties to suppliers in Mexico. Now there is greater competition over a smaller amount of product,” he said, which leads to “an evolution in violence.”

“Young members (of gangs) go to Mexico as tourists and are murdered,” he said, explaining that he knew of four recent murders of Canadians in Mexico known to be involved in the Canadian drug trade. Law enforcement agencies in Mexico “are just overwhelmed with the number of murders right now.”

By: Sarah Ratchford — CUP Atlantic Bureau Chief

FREDERICTON (CUP) — The countless citizens who protested the contentious deal to sell much of NB Power’s assets to Hydro-Québec can breathe a sigh of relief — the $3.2-billion deal has been cancelled.

On March 24, Premier Shawn Graham declared that the deal — which, after five months of public discussions, was to be finalized within weeks — would no longer go through.

He met with Quebec premier Jean Charest the night before, and announced at the New Brunswick legislature that Quebec had proposed changes to the deal that would not be in the best interest of New Brunswick residents.

“It is with much regret that I am announcing this morning that we are no longer proceeding with discussions to finalize the energy agreement with Hydro-Québec,” he told the assembly.

In a statement, he said that “over the past several weeks, as we worked to take the energy agreement and turn it into a full legal document, a number of issues emerged.

“Hydro-Québec asked for changes to the agreement that would have unacceptably taken away some of the value and increased some of the risks for New Brunswickers.”

The premier said he still stands by the merits of the original $4.8-million deal, as well as the amended deal proposed in January.

“However, with Hydro-Québec’s proposed changes, I do not believe New Brunswick receives enough in direct benefits and reduced risks to provide a deal worth signing.”

Graham said that Hydro-Québec, in doing “its due diligence,” found more long-term risks than it was willing to deal with. The company’s changed position meant that the agreement could not be met, and Graham said that his government could not accept that.

Opposition MLA Bruce Fitch, who was New Brunswick’s minister of energy from 2003–2006 under Progressive Conservative premier Bernard Lord, said Graham is trying to pawn the decision off on Hydro-Québec.

“It’s interesting that Mr. Graham, the premier, is laying this all at the feet of Hydro-Québec — I think it’s the voice of the people that has been heard,” he said.

He called the announcement an excuse to save “whatever’s left of his credibility.”

Fitch also said that the Liberal premier should apologize to New Brunswickers, and that Jack Keir, the current minister of energy, should apologize to NB Power employees.

“NB Power has been a symptom of the whole mismanagement of this government.”

Despite the recent troubles, Graham said he plans to continue working on energy issues in the province.

“I think it is pretty clear to everyone that, even if you are doing the right thing, or the necessary thing, there is a right way and a wrong way of going about it,” he said.

“People were not upset with us for taking on the electricity issue; they were angry with us because they wanted to be part of the solution and our process did not let them in.”

Graham said he looks forward to working with the people of New Brunswick to solve the province’s energy troubles.

Baron contributors Rafal Symanski and Wren Crandell report from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

The 5^th World Urban Forum, hosted by UN-HABITAT, took place in Rio de Janerio, Brazil, from March 22^nd- 26^th, 2010. Two students from UNBSJ, Wren Crandall, and Rafal Szymanski flew to Brazil to experience and take part in the conference.  The event was an opportunity for the world to meet and discuss issues pertaining to the surge in urban areas around the world.  The world was invited, and the world came.  Representatives from six continents were present and eager to exchange views and their own personal histories.

The city immediately made a positive impression on both Wren and Rafal.  The picturesque mountains surrounding the city differ greatly from the relatively flat landscape of New Brunswick.  The weather was perfect for all seven days of the students’ stay, never falling below 30 degrees Celsius.

The conference did not disappoint either!  The organization was excellent and was easily capable of accommodating the thousands of participants trekking from across the globe.  The strict security only added to the atmosphere of being a part of something great and important.

The World Urban Forum was comprised of people from all walks of life.  UNBSJ students were rubbing shoulders with slum dwellers, other students, professors, professionals, politicians, and world leaders.  Brazillian and Hatian presidents, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Rene Preval, were present at the conference and inspired the public with speeches about the need to reform the growing urban centers around the world.

The truth is that soon, if not already, the majority of the world’s population will be living in the crowded realities we all urban cities.  This is an image difficult to imagine unless one leaves the confines of small New Brunswick cities and towns.  The rural to urban exodus has impacted societies in many dramatic ways and will continue to do so as the floods of migration towards cities only increase with time.

A new world emerged, a sub-culture, choosing to join their society and begin life within a city.  Sadly, without government help, this resulted in the creation of slums.

The word “slum” in itself is a pejorative term.  It is a term created to degrade and devalue those that are poor.  The word suggests that the neighborhoods that house the majority of urban citizens around the world are informal, short term, and temporary.  This is a myth!  These neighborhoods have existed for generations, are growing at an alarming rate, and must be recognized as equal.

There are many urban myths surrounding slum dwellings and the people that inhabit them.  Firstly, the notion that urban growth in the form of slums exists solely in what we call “Mega” cities is completely false.  Although this phenomenon does occur in these metropolises, the vast majority of rapid urban growth occurs in what we would call growing cities of average size.

Secondly, the myth that the urban poor are minorities in urban cities is also false.  As rural to urban migration patterns are impossible to change, this is something that must be accepted and dealt with.  Instead of being feared and disregarded as lepers people living in the poorest areas of the cities should be embraced as seen as capable of contributing to society.

The urban poor must be seen as the greatest untapped asset a city can possibly have.  The people are willing to work, cooperate and assimilate within a large population to form a more representative mosaic of society.  Government and politics cannot continue to see the urban poor as preventers of progress.

The truth is that a lot of amazing things are happening within these ghetto’s (in Brazil they are called favela’s).  Instead of fighting an impossible war against the government for rights and freedoms on their own, communities have banded together to create informal groups that have common goals.  With larger public support, the message is louder, better heard, and carries more weight.  It is thus harder to ignore.

Requests for community level ownership and civic participation, strictly within favela’s, are a common first step in attaining hope and a relationship of trust between government and citizen.  Although this road is rarely travelled without bumps along the road, it is possible and it is suggested that it will occur more frequently in the near future.

These requests for ownership must be followed by economic stimulus.  This economic upgrading must be imposed by socio-economic reasons.  The financial aid given to the public must be given in accordance with their needs.  It therefore makes much sense that slum dwellers should be given a voice in the matter.

In Brazil, on the other hand, it does not work this way.  In Rio’s biggest favela, Rocihna, a sports complex that includes soccer fields, basketball and volleyball courts, and a swimming pool, was unveiled as an urban upgrading success by president Lula.  After a panel discussion at the World Urban Forum, question period revealed how little slum dwellers enjoyed multi-million dollar projects.

One member of a favela pointed out the lack of clean water, sanitation, schools, and roads as more important in improving the standard of living in his community.  But the building of roads and drainage does not make for good publicity.  Politicians tend to support projects that will benefit their careers more than they will benefit the citizens they supposedly represent.  What is more shocking is that many people who are expected to vote (voting is compulsory except for those 16-18 years of age and those older than 70) do not have access to electricity, clean water or work.  While being expected to vote, a large part of society is not represented by politicians.  It is not uncommon for entire slum communities, some housing as many as 40,000 people, to be destroyed by private businesses in order to build high-rises, shopping malls, or standardized reform housing (cookie-cutter homes that look like ghetto suburban dwellings).

Change is needed, desperately, but this change is not something that can be pulled out of a hat.  It cannot be solely charity given to those who need it.  It must be effort that builds partnerships and interaction between governments and NGO’s (non-governmental organizations) to better the situation of the poor.  The answer is not a “cookie-cutter” solution.  It does not fit in all instances.  Every slum is a neighborhood comprising of different people; every one of the communities is different.

Slum upgrading affects the city as a whole, not just the poor.  In order to accomplish this, urban planning, the economy, city growth, migration patterns, and cultures all must be taken into account.  This feat can end in success, but it cannot be done quickly.  As one presenter at the conference said: “it must start somewhere, with a push of a snowball down a hill.”  It is this incremental upgrading, with the cooperation of all parties concerned, that will lead to a maximized success.

The conference raised many questions and issues that surprised both UNBSJ students.  The time spent in Rio de Janeiro was beneficial because it allowed the students to network with people interested and already involved in the political and social programs needed to make change a reality.

The beauty of the city, its grandeur, was only magnified with the realization that slums exist not on the outskirts of cities, but are conveniently, or inconveniently according to which perspective, placed amid the rich and prospering areas.  This makes them impossible to ignore.  Slums are a part of everyday life in developing countries.  They will continue to grow, and their citizens must be taken into account when developing cities.  Good planning is impossible without good government and as educated citizens, it is our responsibility to change government to become just, fair, transparent, and efficient.

Rafal Symanski is a Baron Staff Writer and Wren Crandell is a regular contributor to the Travel section.